2019 (9) TMI 910 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal, overturning disallowances under Section 14A, Rule 8D, and Section 115JB.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting the disallowances made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D and under Section 115JB. The decisions ... Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- Identical issue has been dealt with GUJARAT POWER CORPORAT ION LTD. AND (VICE-VERSA) [2019 (7) TMI 700 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] as relying on SHRENO LTD [2018 (12) TMI 1145 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] hence the assessee is entitled to relief as claimed for which was rightly allowed by the CIT(A) by deleting the addition made by the Learned AO without any infirmity so as to warrant interference. The question is accordingly answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Disallowance applying provision of Section 115JB while completing disallowances under section 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2019 (7) TMI 700 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] we find from the issue citation that in the same set of facts the computation under clause (f) of explanation 1 to section 115JB as has been done by the authorities below u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Income Tax Act, 1962 is not permissible and hence such disallowance is quashed the addition is therefore deleted. This ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is thus allowed Issues Involved:1. Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D.2. Disallowance under Section 14A while computing income under Section 115JB.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8DThe assessee challenged the disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, which was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee argued that this issue was already decided in their favor for previous assessment years (2011-12 and 2012-13) by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT Ahmedabad, which relied on the Gujarat High Court judgment in PCIT vs. Shreno Ltd.Upon review, it was noted that the assessee, a government-promoted company, had declared a dividend income of Rs. 1,26,94,978/- as exempt under Section 10 of the Income Tax Act and had suo moto disallowed Rs. 1,00,000/- as expenses related to earning this exempt income. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) made an additional disallowance of Rs. 51,61,129/- under Section 14A.The Coordinate Bench had previously dealt with a similar issue where it was held that the AO did not properly appreciate the use of interest-free funds for investments yielding tax-free income and had erroneously applied Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal found that the disallowance was not automatic and should be based on specific satisfaction recorded by the AO. Since the assessee had already disallowed Rs. 1,00,000/-, further disallowance was unwarranted.The Tribunal, relying on the Gujarat High Court judgment in PCIT vs. Shreno Ltd., upheld the deletion of the disallowance made by the AO, finding no reason to deviate from the earlier decisions.Issue 2: Disallowance under Section 14A while computing income under Section 115JBThe second issue pertained to the disallowance under Section 14A while calculating income under the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) provisions of Section 115JB. The assessee argued that this issue was also covered in their favor by the Special Bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., which was acknowledged by the Coordinate Bench in previous orders.The AO had disallowed Rs. 51,61,079/- under Section 14A by applying Rule 8D while computing income under Section 115JB. The assessee contended that such disallowance was not permissible under the MAT provisions, as supported by the ITAT Delhi's Special Bench ruling, which stated that the computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB should be made without resorting to Section 14A read with Rule 8D.The Tribunal, after considering the relevant materials and the judgment in Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., concluded that the AO's disallowance under Section 14A while computing MAT was incorrect. Consequently, the addition was deleted, and the assessee's appeal on this ground was allowed.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal on both grounds, deleting the disallowances made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D and under Section 115JB, respectively. The decisions were based on the precedents set by the Coordinate Bench and the Gujarat High Court, ensuring consistency and adherence to judicial principles. The appeal was thus decided in favor of the assessee.